Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Guest happy?

Most Over-priced Shithole

Recommended Posts

Guest happy?

Can anyone please explain to me why less than an acre of land in Poole is worth almost as much as 1200 acres less than thirty miles away.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

Sandbanks is not London and it is not New York - it's a stubby little spit of land that will be inundated in fifteen years by rising sea levels.

Fools and their money...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest happy?
Google Maps BH13

What is it, some kind of bunker? :lol:

God knows, unstable and unproductive land with a threat of flooding. You'd have to be weak in the head to pay more than £5k per acre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can anyone please explain to me why less than an acre of land in Poole is worth almost as much as 1200 acres less than thirty miles away.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

Sandbanks is not London and it is not New York - it's a stubby little spit of land that will be inundated in fifteen years by rising sea levels.

Fools and their money...

i can see a few tents and stuff in the backyard, and some strange girls running about with chains on their feet. nothing to worry about. preteen hareems are expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can anyone please explain to me why less than an acre of land in Poole is worth almost as much as 1200 acres less than thirty miles away.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sa...26radius%3D40.0

Sandbanks is not London and it is not New York - it's a stubby little spit of land that will be inundated in fifteen years by rising sea levels.

Fools and their money...

Only fabulous people will understand the value. No, I don't understand it either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable

Probably quite a convenient place for landing cocaine I've always thought.

Can't see many other reasons for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bookmarked this BBC story over eight years ago and it remains in my Favorites subfolder that's named Unfookingbelievable.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/961423.stm

Britain's golden riviera

A tiny neighbourhood on the south coast has been named the fourth most expensive place to live in the world.

House prices on the two-mile Sandbanks peninsula overlooking Poole harbour in Dorset are higher than in Singapore, New York or Paris.

The average price of a two-bedroom flat in Sandbanks means only Tokyo, Hong Kong and central London have more expensive districts to live in.

Sandbanks has become popular among celebrities in recent years, including pop star Louise and her footballer husband Jamie Redknapp, Tottenham Hotspur's Darren Anderton and former England cricketer Geoffrey Boycott. Veteran singer Sir Max Bygraves also lives in the area.

New York estate agent Corcoran reported the figures in its latest survey of property prices.

The most expensive place in the world to live is Shoto in Tokyo's Shibuya district, at £895 per square foot.

Sandbanks has a coveted harbourside location

Next comes Hong Kong's Barker Road, where property goes for £859 per square foot, followed by Eaton Square in London's Belgravia at £775.

Sandbanks properties cost £689 per square foot - more expensive than New York's Fifth Avenue at £627.

Tom Doyle, managing director of Sandbanks-based Lloyds Executive and Waterside Properties, said: "It is the most expensive place in the world for an area solely dedicated to leisure.

"But so big is the demand to own a part of the peninsula that prices have soared in the last five years.

"Many of the properties are just used a few months of the year, but owners pay for the views, beaches and moorings."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest happy?
I bookmarked this BBC story over eight years ago and it remains in my Favorites subfolder that's named Unfookingbelievable.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/961423.stm

Britain's golden riviera

"Many of the properties are just used a few months of the year, but owners pay for the views, beaches and moorings."

They clearly are demented. In any of the city locations there's going to be a business cost driving-up land values and there's a certain cache attached to the right address.

But there's nothing you can see from Sandbanks which cannot be seen anywhere between Selsey Bill and Durdle Door.

At some point someone's going to wonder whether they've bought the emperor's new clothes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But where else could you live next to pop star Louise and her footballer husband Jamie Redknapp, Tottenham Hotspur's Darren Anderton, former England cricketer Geoffrey Boycott and veteran singer Sir Max Bygraves?

Whilst sleeping in a tent filling in the planning application! :lol:

At some point someone's going to wonder whether they've bought the emperor's new clothes.

Great turn of phrase B)

Edited by TheEmperorHasNoClothes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd have a place on Studland anyday. You couldn't pay me to live on Sandw4nk5.

You just like perving on the nudist beach

Actually on a nice hot summer day you could easily be aboard. Sod sandbanks though prefer Purbeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest happy?
I'd have a place on Studland anyday. You couldn't pay me to live on Sandw4nk5.

Sandbanks: - It's got to be the definition of overpriced:

Just compare the views - one of these is green, lush, with that missing something. Whilst the other clearly will be sold to a lush, green, with something missing.

sandwanks.jpg

backyard.jpg

post-8753-1253659539_thumb.jpg

post-8753-1253659549_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But where else could you live next to pop star Louise and her footballer husband Jamie Redknapp, Tottenham Hotspur's Darren Anderton, former England cricketer Geoffrey Boycott and veteran singer Sir Max Bygraves?

The set of "I'm a washed up has-been, get me on the telly again"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBH the area around Sandbanks is the only part of the UK seaside i havent found downright depressing. Although i suspect it may have other problems, like being full of snobs, flash gits etc. Plus for that sort of money you could get somewhere else abroad a lot nicer than Bournemouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But where else could you live next to pop star Louise and her footballer husband Jamie Redknapp, Tottenham Hotspur's Darren Anderton, former England cricketer Geoffrey Boycott and veteran singer Sir Max Bygraves?

This is "talking the market up " by Tom Doyle of Lloyds property group. That plot has been up for development for years.

Actually the Geoff Boycott property is one he bought for his mistress for weekend liasons (she still lives there), Sir Max (God rest his soul) was more of a Branksome Park man. And how can you call one hit wonder Louise a popstar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the two obvious pitfalls:

1) "The red line may not be indicative of the true boundaries of the site and is intended as a guideline only. "

So what your looking at may not even be what is for sale

2) "Suitable for redevelopment (STPP)"

The price you are paying doesn't even buy you a house worth living in, and you aren't guaranteed to be allowed to build one either.

So sign me up.... what a bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been overly keen of Bournemouth - I'm sure that there's loads of nice people there, but on a night out, its full of pretentious JP Morgan arseoles who love to flash their dosh.. Parkstone is supposed to be the "affordable" part of the area (I know its Poole!) but even then, housing there is ridiculously overpriced.

With that Compton Pauncefoot mansion, I wonder if its affected by A303 traffic noise..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glug glug!

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/c...row-461146.html

It may be very exclusive, but it's going to be very wet. Sandbanks, Britain's seaside millionaire's row on the Dorset coast, faces a future of flooding because of sea-level rise caused by global warming.

The narrow peninsula between Poole harbour and the sea is home to some of Britain's costliest properties, this year reaching about £20m per acre.

But in the lifetime of a child born today the risk of serious inundation is going to soar, according to the Environment Agency.

Much of Sandbanks is barely above sea level, giving an immediacy of access to the water which is one of the main reasons for its desirability. But it also means that the peninsula - in essence merely a sand spit - faces a double risk from rising sea levels and increased storminess, both predicted as consequences of climate change.

At present the Environment Agency calculates that the risk of Sandbanks being flooded by an exceptionally high tide - leaving aside storms and the surges in sea level that can go with them - is one in 200.

But this risk starts to increase sharply in future decades: by 2027 it is one in 87, by 2047 it is one in 20 and by 2057 it is one in 10. The possibility of storm surges elevates the risk still further, and in the next few months the agency is going to try to model this.

"We are all attracted to locations near rivers and by the sea, but they come with inherent risks," said Nick Lyness, the agency's area flood risk manager.

"In the case of Sandbanks it is a very low-lying area immediately adjacent to the sea on an exposed peninsula of land that is subject to erosion, and will become increasingly affected by the risk of flooding from sea-level rise and increased storminess."

Last week a consultant in coastal geomorphology made local headlines when he wrote to theBournemouth Echo saying that climate change would make Sandbanks uninhabitable within 25 years.

"The insurance alone is going to be prohibitively expensive," said Edward Coombe. "I feel for the people who have been encouraged to invest in vastly expensive properties. They might be all right for their lifetime, but for their children and grandchildren it could be catastrophic."

The agency and the local council, the Borough of Poole, do not accept Dr Coombe's timescale. However, Mr Lyness said it was "absolutely" the case that the flood risk was going to rise, and eventually hard decisions would have to be made - by the inhabitants, about whether they wanted to continue living there, and by the authorities, about whether additional coastal protection measures were appropriate and/or affordable.

"While Sandbanks may be of particular interest, prompted by its high-value houses, it is a manifestation of issues all around the English coast," he said. "There are other locations that will flood before Sandbanks, that also merit consideration."

World sea-levels are rising because of the warming atmosphere for two reasons: water expands in volume as it warms, and ice from land-based ice sheets such as those covering Greenland and Antarctica adds to the level when it melts into the sea.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that world sea levels are currently rising at a rate of about 3.1 millimetres per year. But this is likely to increase in future years as the melting of the great ice sheets speeds up.

America's leading climate scientist, James Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, thinks the IPCC has gravely underestimated the speed and the contribution of the melting ice sheets. Last week he forecast that instead of the total rise in global sea levels of less than a metre forecast by the IPCC for 2100, the world would see a "multi-metre" rise during the coming century, although his projections are not the official wisdom.

The current contingency allowances for sea-level rise for south-west England, recommended by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, are 3.5mm per year up till 2025, 8mm per year between 2025 and 2055 and 11.5mm per year between 2055 and 2085. This allows for a sea-level rise of about 80cms - more than two feet - between now and 2085. Even that would cause serious if not insuperable problems for Sandbanks if it were to happen.

"A decision on whether or not Sandbanks is defensible will have to be made in the future," said Don Collier, holder of the environment portfolio on Poole Council.

I'm not totally sure how you interpret the probabiltiies. You get about a dozen big tides a year (four times a year, three times each). If you then also get a combination of:

Low pressure (raises sea level)

On shore wind (funnelling effect)

Rough seas (waves break well above the tide level)

Then the sea washes over a good six foot over the tide level.

Even a 1 in 200 chance of flooding would be a bit much for me as that means it's likely to happen eveyr twenty years. One in 10 means temporary strucures only, or a high sea wall.

I bet the insurance premiums are massive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TBH the area around Sandbanks is the only part of the UK seaside i havent found downright depressing. Although i suspect it may have other problems, like being full of snobs, flash gits etc. Plus for that sort of money you could get somewhere else abroad a lot nicer than Bournemouth.

You what?

Have you only been to Southend and Blackpool then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually the Geoff Boycott property is one he bought for his mistress for weekend liasons (she still lives there)

Boycott has been in court moaning his head off about the law because the mistress got a share in it which she passed to a niece.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048305/Geoff-Boycott-sues-lawyers-loss-3m-mansion-partner-died.html

Hasn't he still got his Jersey house? Not enough house price inflation for him? It was put up for sale last year and the asking price reported to have just been just by £500,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   288 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.